BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

 

The Status of the Broken Rib Issue between Belief and History

 

For the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah, this story is merely a fabrication with no basis in historical narrations. They consider it a story concocted by extremists to explain ‘Ali’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu pledge of allegiance and to cast doubt on Abu Bakr’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu Caliphate. No authenticated or even weak or fabricated narrations in the heritage of the Ahlus Sunnah mention this story. As for what the opponents cite from texts attributed to the narrations of the Ahlus Sunnah, they are all devoid of mentioning the story of the broken rib or the miscarriage of al Muhsin, as will be detailed later.^[1]

As for the Imamiyyah, it appears that this issue was not of great importance to their early scholars. Perhaps, the clearest evidence of this is that the book al Kafi by al Kulayni, which is the greatest, most reliable, and most important book of the Imamiyyah, does not mention anything about the story of the breaking of the rib. Similarly, Nahj al Balaghah, which is dedicated to collecting the sayings, speeches, and letters attributed to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, does not address the issue of the breaking of the rib. Moreover, Ibn Babawayh al Qummi, who mentioned two narrations about the story of the breaking of the rib in his book al Amali did not refer to this story in his book al I’tiqadat, even though he summarised his beliefs about Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha, which included claims of her being subjected to oppression and the usurpation of her right to inheritance.^[2]

Today, exaggeration in the disputes among the three Rightly Guided Khulafa’ has led many contemporaries to elevate the issue of the breaking of the rib to a level of essential and established doctrinal matters. A pioneer in this direction is Jafar Murtada al ‘Amili, who has made the issue of the breaking of the rib one of the most important issues in Islam and faith! He states:

هي واحدة من أهم مسائل الإسلام والإيمان لأنها^[3] تمس قضية الإمام والإمامة بعد رسول الله فهو حدث تاريخي سياسي له مساس بالإمام والإمامة وهو أمر عقائدي خطير وهام جدًا

It is one of the most important issues in Islam and faith because it touches upon the issue of the Imam and Imamah after the Messenger of Allah. It is a historical and political event that affects the Imam and Imamah, which is a serious and important doctrinal matter.^[4]

 

He also says:

 

قضية الزهراء إذن أساسية في حياتنا الفكرية والإيمانية ولها ارتباط بأمر أساسي في هذا الدين فلا ينبغي الاستهانة بها أو التقليل من أهميتها

The issue of Fatimah is therefore fundamental in our intellectual and doctrinal lives and it is related to a fundamental matter in this religion. It should not be underestimated or its importance diminished.^[5]

 

‘Ali al Milani followed the same extreme path in the matter of the breaking of the rib, saying:

 

الحقيقة أن قضية الزهراء سلام الله عليها أساس مذهبنا وجميع القضايا التي لحقت تلك القضية وتأخرت عنها كلها مترتبة على تلك القضية

In truth, the issue of Fatimah, peace be upon her, is the foundation of our doctrine, and all issues related to that issue and resulting from it are associated with it.^[6]

 

Furthermore, Hashim al Hashimi considered denial of the breaking of the rib as deviating from the doctrine, arguing:

 

نجد أن كبار مراجعنا اعتبروا كلام فضل الله في التشكيك في شهادة الزهراء عليها السلام وبقية المسائل العقائدية المرتبطة بالمذهب كلام ضلال وحكموا عليه بأنه ضال مضل

We find that our senior scholars considered Fadl Allah’s words casting doubt on Fatimah’s testimony, peace be upon her, and other doctrinal issues related to the doctrine as misleading speech and they judged him as misguided, misleading.^[7]

 

On the other hand, Muhammad Hussain Fadl Allah and his supporters view the broken rib issue as a historical matter unrelated to doctrine. Fadl Allah states:

 

مسألة ضلع الزهراء عليها السلام هذه قضية تاريخية لا قضية متصلة بالعقيدة

The issue of al Zahra’s rib is a historical matter, not a doctrinal one.^[8]

 

Najib Nur al Din agrees stating:

 

قضية الزهراء عليها السلام قضية تاريخية وليست متصلة بالعقيدة ولا نعتبرها شرطًا من شروط الإيمان

The issue of al Zahra is a historical issue, not connected to belief. We do not regard it a condition of faith.^[9]

 

Haydar Hubb Allah believes that the disagreement in this issue is not doctrinal but rather a historical disagreement.^[10] Yasir ‘Awdah considers the issue of the broken rib a historical incident^[11], stating:

 

إن مسألة كسر الضلع مسألة تاريخية لا تتصل بجانب العقيدة كما يصورها بعض الجهلة الذين مروا مرور الكرام على العلم فما استطاعوا أن يفرقوا بين المسألة التاريخية وبين المسألة العقائدية وبين ضرورات المذهب ومشهوراته وبين ضرورات الدين ومشهوراته

The issue of the broken rib is a historical matter not related to the aspect of creed as portrayed by some ignorant people who passed by the nobles of knowledge. They were unable to distinguish between a historical issue and a doctrinal issue, between the necessities and well-known aspects of the school of thought, and between the necessities and well-known aspects of religion.^[12]

 

The undeniable truth is that this issue has no connection to doctrine in any way. A believer’s faith would not be diminished if they never knew about this fabricated story. As Yasir ‘Awdah said:

 

الذي يقول بكسر الضلع أو لا يقول لا تزيد في إيمانه ولا تنقص من دينه

Believing or not believing in the broken rib does not increase or decrease one’s faith.^[13]

 

Thus, the correct view is that the issue of the broken rib is a historical matter unrelated to doctrine and faith.

Those who consider the broken rib issue as part of doctrinal matters and elevate it to the level of faith face a significant challenge. Doctrinal and faith issues cannot be established based on mere conjecture; they require certainty and proof. It is impossible to establish the broken rib incident based on a few narrations afflicted with critical flaws in the chain and text, rendering them fabricated. These issues must be proven by authenticated narrations, which is not the case with the broken rib narrations. Even those who believe in the authenticity of the broken rib story do not consider all narrations on the subject authentic. They claim that only a handful of narrations are authentic. Therefore, they resorted to asserting that the narrations of the broken rib reached a level of widespread and famous acceptance, and some even claimed they were mutawatir (transmitted by numerous narrators). However, such claims are untenable for the broken rib narrations, as will be detailed later. They resorted to these assertions because they knew that claiming the broken rib story as part of doctrinal matters would necessitate proving it using the same methods they use to establish doctrinal beliefs.

 

Implications of Believing in the Broken Rib Myth

Integrating the broken rib story into doctrinal books has given this issue a doctrinal dimension after it was merely mentioned in historical works. Consequently, the broken rib story has been employed in three ways within the doctrinal heritage:

 

1. The claim that ‘Ali was coerced into pledging allegiance to Abu Bakr

Some have consistently used the broken rib story to assert that ‘Ali’s pledge to Abu Bakr was not out of approval and choice, but due to coercion and compulsion.^[14] Muhammad Sadiq al Ruhani states:

 

ما جرى على الزهراء عليها السلام من أخذ مالها وكسر ضلعها إنما هو من أجل دفاعها ومطالبتها بحق الإمام علي عليه السلام كما تشهد لذلك عدة فقرات من خطبتها فكيف تكون بعيدة عن فرضية خلافة علي عليه السلام

What happened to Zahra’ ‘alayha al Salam, including the usurping of her property and the breaking of her rib, was because of her defense and claim for Imam ‘Ali’s ‘alayh al Salam right, as several parts of her sermon testify to this. So how could it be far from the premise of ‘Ali’s ‘alayh al Salam Caliphate?^[15]

 

‘Abdul Zahra’ Mahdi says that the issue of the breaking of the rib:

 

يثبت عدم بيعة أمير المؤمنين لأبي بكر اختيارًا وإنما بايع إجبارًا بعد أن أحرقوا باب الدار وأرادوا إحراق البيت على أهله

Proves that the allegiance of the Commander of the Faithful to Abu Bakr was not by choice. He only gave allegiance under compulsion after they burned the door of the house and intended to burn the house over its inhabitants.^[16]

 

The head of the Center for Doctrinal Research, Muhammad al Hassun, says about the issue of the breaking of the rib:

 

تترتب عليه آثار عقائدية كبيرة متصلة بما جرى من مآس وويلات على آل الرسول بعد فقدِ عميدها وقائدها متمثلة بما صاحب وأعقب السقيفة التي أزالت الحق عن أهله

It has significant doctrinal implications connected to the tragedies and calamities that befell the family of the Messenger after the loss of their chief and leader, represented by what accompanied and followed the Saqifah which removed the right from its rightful owners.^[17]

 

2. Accusing Abu Bakr and ‘Umar of enmity towards the Ahlul Bayt

The broken rib story has become a tool for proponents of the enmity theory between the Ahlul Bayt and prominent Companions to substantiate their imaginary claim that lacks real basis. Early scholars mentioned this myth within their criticisms of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, as did Abu al Qasim al Kufi in his book al Istighathah fi Bida’ al Thalathah^[18], Abu al Qasim al Sharif al Murtada in al Shafi^[19], Abu Jafar al Tusi in Talkhis al Shafi^[20], and those who followed them.^[21]

This issue has evolved among later scholars to the point where they accuse Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma of enmity towards the Ahlul Bayt and even declare them disbelievers. This is evident in the statements of some contemporary scholars. When al Khu’i ruled that Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma were outwardly Muslim, according to his opinion, he said:

 

ومن هنا يحكم بإسلام الأولين الغاصبين لحق أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام إسلاما ظاهريًا لعدم نصبهم ظاهرًا عداوة أهل البيت

And from here, the apparent Islam of the first usurpers of the right of the Commander of the Faithful ‘alayh al Salam is judged,^[22] due to their apparent non-display of enmity towards the Ahlul Bayt.^[23]

 

His student Taqi al Tabataba’i al Qummi criticised him, saying:

 

ومن الغريب ما عن سيدنا الأستاذ على ما في التقرير… فإنا نسأل من سيدنا الأستاذ أي عداوة أعظم من الهجوم إلى دار الصديقة وإحراق بابها وضرب الطاهرة الزكية وإسقاط ما في بطنها

What our respected teacher proffered is strange, as in the report. We ask our respected teacher: Is there any greater enmity than attacking the house of the truthful one, burning its door, striking the pure and immaculate one, and causing what was in her womb to be miscarried?^[24]

 

He mentioned other fabricated matters about Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma, but the first thing he began with was recounting the story of the breaking of the rib, because it has now become the foremost argument used by opponents to prove the enmity of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar towards the Ahlul Bayt radiya Llahu ‘anhum. This matter is not new, as this objection is similar to what Yusuf al Bahrani (d. 1186 AH) objected to against those who pronounced the Islam of the two Khalifahs, Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. He said:

 

من العجب الذي يضحك الثكلى والبين البطلان الذي أظهر من كل شيء وأجلى أن يحكم بنجاسة من أنكر ضروريًا من سائر ضروريات الدين وإن لم يعلم أن ذلك منه عن اعتقاد ويقين ولا يحكم بنجاسة من يسب أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام وأخرجه قهرًا مقادًا يساق بين جملة العالمين وأدار الحطب على بيته ليحرقه عليه وعلى من فيه وضرب الزهراء عليها السلام حتى أسقط جنينها ولطمها حتى خرت لوجهها وجبينها وخرجت لوعتها وحنينها مضافًا إلى غصب الخلافة الذي هو أصل هذه المصائب وبيت هذه الفجائع والنوائب

It is astonishing and laughable to the blind, and the clearest evidence that appears from everything, that they judge someone impure who denies a necessary belief among all the necessary beliefs of religion, even if he does not know that it is from him in terms of belief and certainty, yet they do not judge someone impure who cursed the Commander of the Faithful ‘alayh al Salam, dragged him with ropes between the two camels, and set fire to his house to burn him and those inside it, struck Fatimah ‘alayha al Salam until they caused her fetus to miscarry, slapped her until her cheek and forehead became bruised , and she cried in agony and longing her tear ducts and yearning flowed out, in addition to the usurpation of the caliphate which is the root of these calamities and the source of these tragedies and misfortunes.

 

Muhsin al Mu’allim considered ‘Umar ibn al Khattab radiya Llahu ‘anhu among the group known as the Nawasib, and made the legend of breaking the rib one of his arguments for that.^[25]

 

3. The claim of oppression of Fatimah and the Ahlul Bayt

This matter began in later writings that carved a path of playing on emotions, especially those books classified in the tragedies of Fatimah and her oppression, which later turned into annual gatherings called Ma’tam Fatimah. In these gatherings, the fabricated story is retold, accompanied by ritualistic plays that display the legend of burning the door of Fatimah, assaulting her, and causing the miscarriage of her fetus.

These innovative practices, unrelated to the Ahlul Bayt, have now found dozens of publications that aim to portray Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha and the Ahlul Bayt in a tragic manner completely detached from reality and history. Mention has already been made of some of these writings that adopt this emotional approach, so there is no need to repeat them here.

Thus, it becomes clear that the significance attributed to the story of breaking the rib has reached such a level of importance among some people that it has appeared as one of the arguments used to refute the validity of the allegiance to Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, claiming ‘Ali’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu reluctance to give allegiance. It also attributes Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma to al Nasb and enmity towards the Ahlul Bayt, among other false claims. Therefore, clarifying the invalidity of this story and exposing the weaknesses in its chain of narration and its content results in the collapse of all these claims altogether. Perhaps this could be a reason to lift the veil from those who have been deceived by such invented stories and fallacious arguments, revealing the innocence of the Companions, especially Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. Thus, all claims of rift among the Companions and the Ahlul Bayt based on such stories and narrations have no basis. And success is with Allah.

 

NEXT⇒ Study of the Narrations on the Rib Fracture

---

^[1]  The details of this will come at its place.

^[2]  Al I’tiqadat, pg. 105.

^[3]  Li annahu appears in the printed version.

^[4]  Ma’sat al Zahra’, 1/128.

^[5]  Ma’sat al Zahra’, 1/138.

^[6]  Mazlumiyyat al Zahra’, Pg. 8.

^[7]  Hiwar ma’a Fadl Allah hawla al Zahra’, pg. 30.

^[8]  This text was conveyed by Hashim al Hashimi from a recorded tape of Muhammad Hussain Fadl Allah, see: Hiwar ma’a Fadl Allah hawla al Zahra’, pg. 28.

^[9]  Ma’sat Kitab al Ma’sat, pg. 118-119.

^[10]  Ida’at fi al Fikr wa al Din wa al Ijtima’, 1/554.

^[11]  Qadaya Atharat Jadalan, pg. 179.

^[12]  Qadaya Atharat Jadalan, pg. 187.

^[13]  Qadaya Atharat Jadalan, pg. 187.

^[14]  Refer to: Asrar al Imamah, pg. 115.

^[15]  Al Sayyidah al Zahra’ bayna al Fada’il wa-al Zalamat, pg. 65.

^[16]  Al Hujum ‘ala Bayt Fatimah, pg. 10.

^[17]  Muqaddamat Markaz al Abhath al ‘Aqaʾidiyyah li Kitab al Muhsin al Sibt Mawlud am Saqt, pg. 5.

^[18]  Al Istighathah, 2/77, irrespective of what is said about the author.

^[19]  Al Shafi fi al Imamah, 4/120-121.

^[20]  Talkhis al Shafi, 3/156.

^[21]  See: Ibn Shahrashub: Mathalib al Nawasib (Makhtut) pg. 419-422, through the medium of al Hujum ‘ala Bayt Fatimah, pg. 303-307; al Hilli: Kashf al Murad, pg. 354; ‘Abdul Nabi al Jaza’iri: al Imamah, pg. 218; al Khawaju’i: al Rasa’il al I’tiqadiyyah, 1/528; al Karki: Nafahat al Lahut fi La’n al Jibt wa al Taghut, pg. 130; Sulaiman al Mahuzi: Dhakhirat Yawm al Mahshar fi Bayan Fasad Nasab ‘Umar, pg. 98-99, through the medium of al Hujum ‘ala Bayt Fatimah, pg. 239.

^[22]  The apparent Islam according to al Khu’i means judging them as Muslims in this world and disbelievers in the Hereafter.

^[23]  Fiqh al Shia li al Khu’i bi Taqrir al Musawi al Khalkhali, 3/139.

^[24]  Mabani Minhaj al Salihin, 3/25. The expression is awkward and obscure.

^[25]  Al Nasb wa al Nawasib, pg. 426-427.